|
Since you must know by now how early results are reported and official results are obtained in precincts with lever machines, the answer to how the mistake was made and how it was discovered and rectified is in-your-face obvious.
But then again, a person of your perspicacity surely already knows that.
For others, though, here's a recap.
On election night, the poll workers crack open the back of the lever machine; the poll workers are to be evenly split in number between the two parties that got the most votes in the previous general election. In the back of the machine they see a bunch of what look like odometers. They have a form to fill out, and need to call off numbers from the back of the machine. It's not immediately obvious which 'odometer' goes with which race, there are almost always unused columns and rows interlaced with those that were used, and it's not all that hard to get columns and rows bollixed up so that you call off the wrong numbers, esp. since you only do it once every year or so (and newbies frequently get it wrong). For this reason usually members from the two opposing parties monitor the recording and two do the calling. They close the machine and seal it; then they sign the form and some poll worker carries it over to the BOE. The form = early voting results, and is the first line of defense against tampering.
A week or two later the *official* canvassing of the machines occurs. The BOE--never one person alone, and always with a technician--open each machine and record the numbers. This they do every year, and at least one of the people is typically familiar with the machines so they usually don't make mistakes. They then close the machines up pending acceptance of the final results. If there's a discrepancy between the election-night totals and the official canvassing, they're supposed to resolve the discrepancy and re-examine the machine and talk to at least the precinct captain to reconstruct what led to the discrepancy. Until the machine election totals are zeroed out by a tech, no votes that were recorded are lost.
In this case, as with so many other sensational stories, the routine process that's in place catches the errors that provide the story, but then in the interest of selling the story the process is at least partly obscured, so it's assumed that some divine revelation or whistleblower spoke truth to the powers that be and exposed some horrible secret. The horrible secret is that in this case, it really does seem that the usual, official, plodding, boring process worked, and that the poll workers screwed up (again). But victimhood is so much flashier and conspiracy so much more glamorous and outrage-inducing than simply saying that the faceless clerks and office workers, probably union members, actually just did their job.
Kudos to the faceless union members.
|